Maybe I'm just getting old and crusty, but nerds are really starting to annoy me. They'll worship at alters of their own making for classic books/movies/TV shows, whine and moan about how Something should be filmed like so or Another should be done like this, lament how BSD sci-fi is dying and Oh! won't someone come and give us a new, fresh and exciting take on Whatever...and the minute someone does they descend like a flock of vultures to tear it apart for not being exactly like the original.

jayhawk88:Oh! won't someone come and give us a new, fresh and exciting take on Whatever...and the minute someone does they descend like a flock of vultures to tear it apart for not being exactly like the original.

There is no possible version of this film that will not produce nerd poutrage. I say this as a card-carrying (wrote DS9 fanfic, once spoke Klingon to Michael Dorn) supertrekkie: The 2009 film was great fun, and sensors detect massive amounts of awesomeness being emitted from Into Darkness. Haters can live long and prosper... far away from us.

I don't mind them jettisoning decades of canon to do something else as the last films and TV shows were awful; I do mind a film that can't stick to its own logic and requires everyone to act like idiots and forget things that they've learned in order for the unlikely plot to careen to its conclusion.

I've been watching Star Trek since before most Farkers were born. Many people here seem to be under the false impression that it is some sainted piece of Western literature. It is great fun and has lots of heart, but has enough cheese, plot holes, and scientific errors to sink a battleship. Everyone should stop acting like Abrams is George Lucas and Roddenberry was George Lucas.

As for the alien tail, sure it's always been there. It was just usually more covered between the neck and thighs.

Yup, they intentionally pushed costuming standards as far as they could on network TV at the time. They had a costume designer (William Ware Theiss) who basically was in a constant fight with NBC about how much skin he could show and what parts of the female anatomy he could show on TV.

If network censors would have allowed a bra & panties shot like that in the late 60's on TV, they would have done it in a heartbeat.

gaslight:I don't mind them jettisoning decades of canon to do something else as the last films and TV shows were awful; I do mind a film that can't stick to its own logic and requires everyone to act like idiots and forget things that they've learned in order for the unlikely plot to careen to its conclusion.

Pretty much this. I get bored at any sci-fi move, heck ANY movie, where you can tell they just started making shiat up to just get the damn movie done oh and BOSS FIGHT!

The script even farking sucked in the last one. I mean "Either they're going down, or we're going down!" Kirk said cheesy things, not idiotic things.

Silverstaff:Yup, they intentionally pushed costuming standards as far as they could on network TV at the time. They had a costume designer (William Ware Theiss) who basically was in a constant fight with NBC about how much skin he could show and what parts of the female anatomy he could show on TV.

Ha ha, I read in of the books (I think it was by Harv Bennet?) that William Ware Theiss essentially came up with the idea of the costume that emphasized underboob during his original run in TOS and he had so many fights with the network censors over it.

Maybe I'm just getting old and crusty, but nerds are really starting to annoy me. They'll worship at alters of their own making for classic books/movies/TV shows, whine and moan about how Something should be filmed like so or Another should be done like this, lament how BSD sci-fi is dying and Oh! won't someone come and give us a new, fresh and exciting take on Whatever...and the minute someone does they descend like a flock of vultures to tear it apart for not being exactly like the original.

I can't wait for Ben Cumberbatch to kick all kinds of ass in this one.

I grew up with TOS and TNG. I've loved Trek my whole life.

Seriously though, folks- TOS Scotty and Bones are dead and everyone else is 75- 80 years old. If you want any new material with these iconic characters that we all love, you just have to accept that some things are going to be different.

I enjoyed the 2009 reboot. I'm sure I'll enjoy the new one as well. I think the new guys all do a fine job, especially Quinto and Urban.

Maybe I'm just getting old and crusty, but nerds are really starting to annoy me. They'll worship at alters of their own making for classic books/movies/TV shows, whine and moan about how Something should be filmed like so or Another should be done like this, lament how BSD sci-fi is dying and Oh! won't someone come and give us a new, fresh and exciting take on Whatever...and the minute someone does they descend like a flock of vultures to tear it apart for not being exactly like the original.

The problem with the reboots isn't that they're different. The problem is that they are not anything like the originals, except for the names. The 2009 Star Trek was, like another poster pointed out, Generic Space Adventure Movie with the Star Trek names pasted on to increase ticket sales.

Most of the TNG movies had the same problem -- see Plinkett's version of "TV Picard vs Movie Picard".

It would be the same thing if one were to remake ST:TMP with Star Wars characters -- The feel is wrong because the characters are not behaving in a way which is consistent with the universe in which they were created -- so their behavior makes no sense. In 2009 Star Trek they try to make sure that a ton of character traits are given lip service (Kirk living in Iowa, McCoy's nickname of "bones", etc) but they're throwaway one-liners so the writers can say they're being true to the original characters.

Take TOS Kirk vs 2009 Kirk. Sure, TOS Kirk likes the ladies, but he was more than that -- he had internal conflicts (ST:2's growing old, ST:6's racism, things like honor, duty, concern for his crew, etc) and he used McCoy and Spock as sounding boards to make the "right" decision. He is a multidimensional character, even within the popular stereotype.

Now, the 2009 Kirk can be described in one word: douchenozzle. He's arrogant, irresponsible, self-centered and a snowflake's wet dream: he gets promoted from recruit to captain in a period of 20 minutes. Would this Kirk give a toss about a crewman that's turned into a dodecahedron and then crushed? Nope, he'd have a cutesy one liner, and then there'd be an explosion.

A franchise universe is more than just the names and the technology. The characters are what makes the universe interesting and they were totally chucked out with the reboot which is why people thinks it sucks.

sprag:Take TOS Kirk vs 2009 Kirk. Sure, TOS Kirk likes the ladies, but he was more than that -- he had internal conflicts (ST:2's growing old, ST:6's racism, things like honor, duty, concern for his crew, etc) and he used McCoy and Spock as sounding boards to make the "right" decision. He is a multidimensional character, even within the popular stereotype.

Now, the 2009 Kirk can be described in one word: douchenozzle. He's arrogant, irresponsible, self-centered and a snowflake's wet dream: he gets promoted from recruit to captain in a period ...

So you're expecting 24-year-old Kirk to be the same as 34 or 54-year-old Kirk?

Wellon Dowd:So you're expecting 24-year-old Kirk to be the same as 34 or 54-year-old Kirk?

Nope, but a real person would be a vast improvement. There were no qualities in the 24yo version of Kirk that would allow him to grow into the legend that he's surely to become. Being an ass isn't a legendary quality. He was a one dimensional character and the writers bent the universe around so he could become a captain and start down that road.

I'm pretty sure that pushing someone and catching them before they fell while saying "Saved your life" would get you promoted to admiral in that universe...

Wellon Dowd:So you're expecting 24-year-old Kirk to be the same as 34 or 54-year-old Kirk?

They had to make him 24 because...?? Or, if for some reason they did, wouldn't it have been more satisfying to say, start with him as an Ensign who barely made it out of the academy and then have him do some amazing ship-saving thing by the end of the movie as helmsman and have someone say he's going to have his own ship some day? No?

Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much? There's suspending disbelief and then there's pulling down your pants and shiatting all over it.

LOL. Your post said the same thing better and more succinctly than mine.

A good compare and contrast that comes to mind is Batman Begins. The audience is allowed to see the character grow into being a badass vigilante instead of him suddenly just deciding to be one and being a complete douche about it at the same time.

Bacontastesgood:Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much? There's suspending disbelief and then there's pulling down your pants and shiatting all over it.

Bacontastesgood:Wellon Dowd: So you're expecting 24-year-old Kirk to be the same as 34 or 54-year-old Kirk?

They had to make him 24 because...??

They had to make him 24 because studio executives believe that nobody under 25 wants to see a movie with a lead over 25. At least they didn't make the Starfleet Academy movie that was talked about for years. We came awfully close to Star Trek Babies as it was with the 2009 film.

I agree that Kirk's rise bogus. But science fiction in general, and Star Trek in specific, has always made the mistake of having a promotion, rather than a medal, be the reward for heroism. And in the Prime Universe he was supposed to have been the youngest captain in Star Fleet, just not that young.

Bacontastesgood:Wellon Dowd: So you're expecting 24-year-old Kirk to be the same as 34 or 54-year-old Kirk?

They had to make him 24 because...?? Or, if for some reason they did, wouldn't it have been more satisfying to say, start with him as an Ensign who barely made it out of the academy and then have him do some amazing ship-saving thing by the end of the movie as helmsman and have someone say he's going to have his own ship some day? No?

Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much? There's suspending disbelief and then there's pulling down your pants and shiatting all over it.

Uh..hello!?!?! He TESTED well! Remember? Pike told him as much. So you reward mensa talent like that into making him acting XO as soon as he breaks some fairly major regulations in stealing aboard the enterprise because you couldn't get on board for cheating at one of the largest tests they offer at the academy.

Yeah, for me it's 2nd place after Wrath of Khan. They farking killed David, which was crucial to show how ruthless the klingons were. Christopher Lloyd was awesome. The bird of prey was awesome. They blew up the old ship. The script has killer lines like "you do what you always do, turn death into a fighting chance for life". Spock might come back, but he won't be the same.

Bacontastesgood:Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much?

sprag:The problem with the reboots isn't that they're different. The problem is that they are not anything like the originals, except for the names. The 2009 Star Trek was, like another poster pointed out, Generic Space Adventure Movie with the Star Trek names pasted on to increase ticket sales.

I generally liked the last ST movie, but I agree here. I'm somewhat ambivalent about seeing the new movie because it just doesn't really seem like a Star Trek film at all. While I get that a reboot can allow for the idea of redefining the series, the trailers at least just look like it could be any random sci-Fi flick, but they chose to stick the Star Trek name over top for name recognition.

I've always thought the "Odd Numbered Trek = Suck" meme didn't make much sense as I thought the 3rd film was pretty good, even if wasn't as good as Wrath of Khan; not to mention that meme seems to imply that IV is a better flick than it really is.

I don't hate it, but it's not really a particularly thoughtful movie. It's a big blockbuster type action movie. Nothing wrong with that, but I wouldn't put it in the same league as, say, Star Trek VI.

I thought it was pretty thoughtful. The film was about friendship and the lengths you would go to save your friends. The things Kirk had to sacrifice his son, his ship, his career. The implications of unethical science (although Carol Marcus kind of skipped town), the first appearance of the "modern Klingon" with their honor and ridges and shiat (yeah, the first 2 minutes of TMP, whatever) that would be used all the way through TNG, the first appearance of the Bird of Prey, which they would use ad nauseum all the way through TNG. That big breasted Klingon female.

Sure, bringing Spock back was some comic book shiat but that wasn't the movie's fault, they had to do it somehow. The movie is a lot deeper than people give it credit for.

As for Trek v2, as long as JJ Abrams hires Robert Orci and the other guy, two hacks who somehow get all the cool jobs, the Trek films will never make sense and will be full of plot holes and inconsistencies. But they're pretty.

WOK and IV are my favorites, too. I don't dislike III, I just don't enjoy it as much as the other two. I thought the first one was glacially paced and sterile and was really disappointed in it.

I enjoyed ST09 and I can't wait to see the new one. I wish they would cut back on the action about 15% though, and spend a little more time on character development. It would definitely pay off in the long run. Chris Pine let slip the other day that he is signed on for 4 films total, we'll have to wait and see how that news pans out.

FeedTheCollapse:I've always thought the "Odd Numbered Trek = Suck" meme didn't make much sense as I thought the 3rd film was pretty good, even if wasn't as good as Wrath of Khan; not to mention that meme seems to imply that IV is a better flick than it really is.

Yeah, the even odd thing is bullshiat. The Motion Picture, while admittedly slow and ponderous, was beautiful visually and the soundtrack was the best in the series. And it felt the most like Star Trek. After the shoot em up fun of Star Wars, ST: TMP was more sci-fi than fantasy/adventure and stayed true to its roots. Trek 2 was of course awesome. Trek 3 as I posted above was pretty good. Trek 4 was fun but really slapsticky, with a fish out of water premise that was enjoyable comically but doesn't hold up too well. Trek 5 was a bit of a mess but if it had decent production values and a better third act it could have been good. 6 was pretty good. Nice end of the cold war allegory.

None of the TNG movies were very good. Yes, even the Borg one, although I guess it was the best of the bunch. Trek 10 was worse than 9. And people seem to like 11, so yeah, enough with the even/odd thing already.

Bacontastesgood:Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much?

Just to point out an inaccuracy that keeps getting repeated. At least three years passed from the time he enlisted to him getting the command. Plus, they had the recommendation of the the alternate timeline spock who could vouch for his qualifications and what he would have achieved if not for alterations to the timeline. (It was printed onscreen 'three years later' or something like that. Maybe 4 years? I don't remember now because it's been a while since I saw it.)

That being said, I still think it's too fast of that kind of jump, but it's a movie and having him as a flunky just wouldn't work.

I have a bigger problem with people just abandoning their stations to run do whatever it is they think they can do better, like chekov abandoning his post to run work the transporter.

The Star Trek movies have always been less faithful to the spirit of Star Trek than the shows to justify their budgets. None of them are particularly brainy. But until they completely mailed it in after VI (that includes all the TNG movies), they at least visibly attempted to adapt Star Trek to Hollywood rather than blatantly attempt to shoehorn Hollywood into an existing franchise.

The weird thing is that they pasted on the Star Trek label to increase ticket sales (presumably, anyway). If you're going to spend $150 million on a space adventure movie, why Star Trek? Most mainstream people today knew little about it. It's like making a AAA first-person shooter video game and calling it "Kasey Keller's Penalty Shoot-out". Not only is it completely inaccurate, you're using a label that wouldn't mean anything to the market you're selling to. It made its money back but more or less what I'd expect a serviceable action movie would get if it used an original title all along.

Silverstaff:Bacontastesgood: Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much?

labman:Just to point out an inaccuracy that keeps getting repeated. At least three years passed from the time he enlisted to him getting the command.

Are you sure about that? From the web site,

James Tiberius Kirk was a 23rd century Human Federation Starfleet officer. As a Starfleet cadet, he was instrumental in the defeat and death of Nero, a Romulan bent on the obliteration of the United Federation of Planets. As a result, he was commissioned directly to the rank of captain and appointed as commanding officer of the service's flagship, the USS Enterprise.

I don't see any 3 years passing in that,

/not to mention he was also on academic probation for the Kobayashi Maru thing.

labman:Bacontastesgood: Put it another way, how believable would it be for some felonious punk ass biatch with no compass to enlist in today's Navy and in a couple of weeks take over as captain of a submarine because everyone else sucks too much?

Just to point out an inaccuracy that keeps getting repeated. At least three years passed from the time he enlisted to him getting the command. Plus, they had the recommendation of the the alternate timeline spock who could vouch for his qualifications and what he would have achieved if not for alterations to the timeline. (It was printed onscreen 'three years later' or something like that. Maybe 4 years? I don't remember now because it's been a while since I saw it.)

That being said, I still think it's too fast of that kind of jump, but it's a movie and having him as a flunky just wouldn't work.

I have a bigger problem with people just abandoning their stations to run do whatever it is they think they can do better, like chekov abandoning his post to run work the transporter.

The TNG ones were just as good as the TOS movies in my eyes. I was born in the TNG series. But loved the TOS just as much. First Contact was the best in TNG era of movies. And one of the best Star Trek movies too due to it being more darker and creepier then the others. The issue I have with Nemesis is how it was cut. It had so many little TNG things in it that would of made it one of the best if it was allowed to stay. Wesley Crusher coming to the wedding, Picards and Dr. Crusher's relationship still being shown. All the original cast was supposed to have a kind of spotlight moment but that was all changed by the higher ups.

Mugato:labman: Just to point out an inaccuracy that keeps getting repeated. At least three years passed from the time he enlisted to him getting the command.

Are you sure about that? From the web site,

James Tiberius Kirk was a 23rd century Human Federation Starfleet officer. As a Starfleet cadet, he was instrumental in the defeat and death of Nero, a Romulan bent on the obliteration of the United Federation of Planets. As a result, he was commissioned directly to the rank of captain and appointed as commanding officer of the service's flagship, the USS Enterprise.

I don't see any 3 years passing in that,

/not to mention he was also on academic probation for the Kobayashi Maru thing.

Made mention in the movie itself. When talking to Captain Pike, who challenged him to have a command in 4 years, he said he would do it in three years. He spent three years in the academy and when Nero almost destroyed Earth and Kirk stopped him. He was rewarded with his own command. Showing Pike he can get his own command in 3 years. They do not directly tell the audience but there are nice little hints throughout the movie telling you the passage of time.

And Kirk always broke Starfleet rules, first known offense was the Kobayashi Maru (seen in Wrath of Kahn) which he was rewarded a medal for Original Thinking. He also broke it when stealing the Enterprise in Search for Spock.

dragonchild:The weird thing is that they pasted on the Star Trek label to increase ticket sales (presumably, anyway). If you're going to spend $150 million on a space adventure movie, why Star Trek? Most mainstream people today knew little about it. It's like making a AAA first-person shooter video game and calling it "Kasey Keller's Penalty Shoot-out". Not only is it completely inaccurate, you're using a label that wouldn't mean anything to the market you're selling to. It made its money back but more or less what I'd expect a serviceable action movie would get if it used an original title all along.

Young people were going to buy tickets to any action/adventure movie. Making it a Star Trek film ensured that they could pull in the senior crowds (like my parents) into a summer blockbuster.